Amiable mood for N.Korea-UN military talks – officials

July 16, 2010 By Leave a Comment

July 15 (Reuters) – North Korean and U.N. Command officers held talks on Thursday on the sinking of a South Korean warship in an amiable mood, agreeing to continue dialogue, after Pyongyang had issued threats of war, officials said.

“The atmosphere was very amiable,” said one officer who attended the meeting by five North Korean officers and 11 from the U.S.-led U.N. Command that oversees the Korean War truce. “There were a lot of smiles and a few laughs,” he said.

The meeting was largely about the mechanics of another yet to be scheduled meeting between generals from the two sides, he added.

Another official said the talks were held without outbursts or lengthy and angry arguments by the North attacking the South or the United States.

A joint team of investigators involving military officers and civilian experts from South Korea, the United States and Sweden in May accused the North of launching a torpedo attack on the South Korean corvette Cheonan in March, killing 46 sailors.

North Korea has denied involvement, threatening war against the South for the accusation that it said was a fabrication by Seoul aimed at political gains.

The U.N. Security Council last week condemned the attack but did not directly blame the North.

North Korea first rejected a call by the U.N. Command to meet and discuss any violation of the armistice that ended the 1950-53 Korean War. It later changed its position and said it would accept such a meeting, after Seoul rejected its proposal to send a military team to inspect the sunken ship.

North Korea at the weekend said it was willing to return to nuclear talks with regional powers that it had boycotted for more than a year. Experts said the North was trying to put the Cheonan incident behind it by offering to talk.

South Korea and the United States reacted with scepticism, saying the North must show it is genuinely interested in easing tensions, first by apologising for the ship incident.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates will meet with their South Korean counterparts in Seoul next week to discuss strengthening security ties. (Reporting by Brett Cole and Jack Kim; Editing by Jeremy Laurence)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

N.Korea calls off talks with UN officers over ship

July 14, 2010 By Leave a Comment

July 13 (Reuters) – North Korea abruptly called off a talks set for Tuesday with the U.S.-led United Nations Command that oversees the Korean War truce, failing to show up for the first meeting to discuss the sinking of a South Korean warship.

North Korea’s military representatives asked for a delay “for administrative reasons,” the U.N. Command said in a statement. An official there said the North may have decided it was not ready for the talks. No new date has been set.

A joint team of investigators involving military officers and civilian experts from the South, the United States and Sweden in May blamed the North for launching a torpedo attack on the South Korean corvette Cheonan in March, killing 46 sailors.

The U.N. Security Council in a statement on Friday condemned the attack but did not directly blame the North. The North denies it was involved in the sinking and has accused the South of masterminding a fabrication for political gain.

North Korea first rejected a call by the U.N. Command to meet and discuss any violation of the armistice that ended the 1950-53 Korean War. It later changed its position and said it would accept such a meeting, after Seoul rejected its proposal to send a military team to inspect the sunken ship.

North Korea at the weekend said it was willing to return to nuclear talks with regional powers that it had boycotted for more than a year. Experts said the North was trying to put the Cheonan incident behind it by offering to talk.

South Korea and the United States reacted with scepticism, saying the North must show it was genuinely interested in easing tensions, first by apologising for the ship incident.

The foreign and defence ministers of the two allies will meet in Seoul next week to discuss strengthening security ties. (Reporting by Jack Kim; Editing by Alex Richardson)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

U.N. response on S.Korea ship raises calls for North talks

July 10, 2010 By Leave a Comment

SEOUL, July 9 (Reuters) – The U.N. Security Council’s likely adoption of a statement on the sinking of a South Korean war on Friday without explicitly blaming the North will begin to shift focus to disarmament talks aimed at reining in Pyongyang.

The conclusion of a month-long diplomacy orchestrated by South Korea and the United States with a Council president’s statement will also likely mean the levelling off of tension fuelled by threats of war, analysts said.

“This bodes well for the six-party talks, in the way the wording stresses peace and security in Northeast Asia, which also has China’s role as mediator in mind,” said Baek Seung-joo of the state-affilaited Korea Institute for Defence Analyses in Seoul.

South Korea had hoped to see the Council adopt a new resolution with binding sanctions imposed on its neighbour as punishment for what it sees as a torpedo attack launched from a submarine that intruded into disputed waters.

Diplomats at the U.N. said a draft statement circulated on Thursday by the United States condemned what it called an attack leading to the sinking of the Cheonan but stopped short of unequivocally blaming the North.

The draft has been agreed by the five permanent council members, including Pyongyang’s ally China, and will likely be put to a vote when its 15 member states meet again on Friday at 1330 GMT, U.N. officials said. [ID:nN08234035]

“This falls short of the (South Korean) government’s plan to hold the North responsible at the Security Council and to put sanctions,” Baek said.

South Korea, Japan and the United States already have sanctions in place aimed at punishing the North for the sinking of the corvette Cheonan in March that killed 46 sailors, and Seoul may impose more as it had pledged to do in its aftermath.

The president’s statement, with the absence of a blame laid on the North, reflected the traditional course of diplomacy taken by China and also Russia that was often based on self interest over what other states presented as hard evidence, Baek said.

“China’s interest in this case was to check against U.S. control over the Korea issue,” he said.

The six-way talks by the two Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia and hosted by China had been stalled since late 2007 and its core agreement to compensate Pyongyang in return for moves to end its nuclear programme appeared to lose all momentum as the North defied warnings and tested a long-range missile and set off a nuclear device in 2009, drawing more U.N. sanctions.

Analysts said those sanctions squeezed the North’s failed economy deeper into hardship and drove Pyongyang’s leaders to take provocative actions to divert attention from domestic woes and boost the stakes for disarmament talks. [ID:nTOE65R07W]

“As long as Kim Jong-il’s ‘military-first policy’ is in place, we can’t rule out the possibility of a second and third Cheonan incident,” said Ha Young-sun, international relations professor at the Seoul National University.

The Security Council statement will also ease discord between China and South Korea, a major investor and trading partner and may help to disperse friction between them that flared over large scale naval drills in the Yellow Sea.

Cai Jian, professor of Korean studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, said China, South Korea and others were searching for a compromise to put the worst of the recent discord behind them.

“This (draft) statement would be impossible unless the various sides were willing to compromise. China is compromising by going ahead with the statement that raises serious concern about the Cheonan, and South Korea has backed away from demanding that North Korea is condemned by name.” (Additional reporting by Chris Buckley in Beijing; Editing by Sugita Katyal)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CORRECTED – SCENARIOS-North Korea again at centre of regional tension

May 26, 2010 By Leave a Comment

North Korea warned it would close the last road link across the increasingly tense peninsula if the South goes ahead with a threat to broadcast anti-Pyongyang propaganda into its hermit neighbour.

Tensions are mounting after the South blamed the North for torpedoing one of its warships, killing 46 sailors.

Following is a look at what may have motivated the North to raise the stakes by sinking the South Korean corvette Cheonan and how it may react to the hard line from the conservative South Korean government of President Lee Myung-bak:

REVENGE

One popularly ascribed motive for the March 26 sinking of the Cheonan was payback for a humiliating defeat in a naval clash in November near their disputed maritime border. The South’s navy was operating under new rules of engagement imposed after Lee took office, to strike fast and strike to win decisively.

The humiliation may have been all the greater because the North, and its self proclaimed “invincible” army, got pounded when it may not even have been looking for a fight in the first place. “It’s a case of getting beaten up when they weren’t even being very cocky,” an expert on the North’s propaganda said.

By most accounts, Kim Jong-il would have to have agreed to the torpedo attack. What may have come as a surprise was that the South was able to come up with evidence — some remains of the torpedo — to prove the North’s involvement.

LEADER UNDER PRESSURE

Some experts say that the attack seems to have been disproportionate to the North’s losses in the November skirmish, especially as most North Koreans would have had no idea the clash had even taken place, and certainly not that it lost.

One explanation is that the reclusive Kim, known at home as the “Dear Leader”, is struggling to secure the succession of his youngest son to head the family dynasty that has run the North since its founding after World War Two.

As a result, he needs to display his strength, especially to the military elite that he has nurtured and put at the top of society’s hierarchy.

Kim himself looks in poor health after an apparent stroke nearly two years ago. His government also reportedly faced rare public unrest after a disastrous change in the value of the currency late last year forced the closure of private markets, which help make up for the state’s inability to supply its own people with enough food.

Dictatorships undergoing internal political turmoil tend to manifest disproportionately belligerent behaviour to the outside world, said Victor Cha, a U.S. expert who had been involved in negotiations with the North.

EXTORTION

North Korea has often staged provocative incidents as a way to get back to the negotiating table with the South and regional powers to extract economic and political concessions.

If this was the motive, then it backfired. Whatever inclination there may have been to bring the six regional powers back together to formulate a massive package of aid to the North in return for Pyongyang’s promise to dismantle its nuclear arms programme all but disappeared with the sinking of the Cheonan.

Kim Jong-il’s interest may have been more in separate talks with the United States to discuss a permanent peace treaty to replace the armistice that ended fighting in the 1950-53 Korean War, than with the group hosted by China and also involved South Korea, Japan and Russia.

Some analysts and defectors from the North say the leaders in Pyongyang have a genuine fear of an invasion by the United States launched from the soil of its ally, South Korea. There is also huge mileage for domestic propaganda purposes in telling its public that it was negotiating with the United States on equal footing. Staging a deadly attack in the waters near a naval border it had disputed gives the North’s military an excuse to demand talks on ending a truce.

PEACE TREATY

This is a variation on the above scenario, with the difference that the North is looking for a security framework instead of aid. The Cheonan sinking is the latest in a series of incidents along the disputed maritime border in the Yellow Sea, including an exchange of artillery fire in January.

Kim Jong-il may be hoping to goad the United States into taking more seriously his demands to agree finally a peace treaty to end formally the 1950-53 Korean War. Washington has been reluctant to be lured into those talks, arguing the North must first give up its efforts to build nuclear weapons.

Much of the justification for his iron rule, and extreme poverty that faces most of his population, is that it is the only way to keep a belligerent United States at bay. A peace treaty would not only allow him to stop raiding his depleted treasury to pay for one of the world’s largest standing armies, some analysts say it would also open the way to international financial aid for his broken economy.

The peninsula remains in a technical state of war because the Korean War ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. If Kim keeps making the Yellow Sea border — drawn unilaterally by the U.S.-led United Nations Command at the end of the war — a combat zone, maybe that would eventually lead to peace treaty talks. After all, previous instances of North Korean misbehaviour resulted in negotiations that led to benefits.

ARMS SALES DEMO

North Korea depended heavily on exports of missile and artillery parts for a large part of its income before U.N. sanctions last year for testing a nuclear device sharply cut off its trade. It may have wanted to demonstrate its capabilities in submarine and torpedo warfare.

(Editing by Jonathan Thatcher and Bill Tarrant)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

SCENARIOS – North Korea again at centre of regional tension

May 26, 2010 By Leave a Comment

North Korea warned it would close the last road link across the increasing tense peninsula if the South goes ahead with a threat to broadcast anti-Pyongyang propaganda into its hermit neighbour.

Tensions are mounting after the South blamed the North for torpedoing one of its warships, killing 46 sailors.

Following is a look at what may have motivated the North to raise the stakes by sinking a South Korean battleship and how it may react to the hard line from the conservative South Korean government of President Lee Myung-bak:

REVENGE

One popularly ascribed motive for the March 26 outh Korean corvette Cheonan was payback for a humiliating beating in a naval clash in November near their disputed maritime border. The South’s navy was operating under new rules of engagement imposed after Lee took office, to strike fast and strike to win decisively.

The humiliation may have been all the greater because the North, and its self proclaimed “invincible” army, got pounded when it may not even have been looking for a fight in the first place. “It’s a case of getting beaten up when they weren’t even being very cocky,” an expert on the North’s propaganda said.

By most accounts, Kim Jong-il would have to have agreed to the torpedo attack. What may have come as a surprise was that the South was able to come up with evidence — some remains of the remains of the torpedo — to prove the North’s involvement.

LEADER UNDER PRESSURE

Some experts say that the attack seems to have been disproportionate to the North’s losses in the November skirmish, especially as most North Koreans would have had no idea the clash had even taken place, and certainly not that it lost.

One explanation is that the reclusive Kim, known at home as the “ear Leader” is struggling to secure the succession of his youngest son to head the family dynasty that has run the North since its founding after World War Two.

As a result, he needs to display his strength, especially to the military elite that he has nurtured as leader and put at the top of society’s hierarchy.

Kim himself looks in poor health after an apparent stroke nearly two years ago. His government also reportedly faced rare public unrest after a disastrous change in the value of the currency late last year forced the closure of private markets, which help make up for the state’s inability to supply its own people with enough food.

Dictatorships undergoing internal political turmoil tend to manifest disproportionately belligerent behaviour to the outside world, said Victor Cha, a U.S. expert who had been involved in negotiations with the North.

EXTORTION

North Korea has often staged provocative incidents as a way to get back to the negotiating table with the South and regional powers to extract economic and political concessions.

If this was the motive, then it backfired. Whatever inclination there may have been to bring the six regional powers back together to formulate a massive package of aid to the North in return for Pyongyang’s promise to dismantle its nuclear arms programme all but disappeared with the sinking of the Cheonan.

Kim Jong-il’s interest may have been more in separate talks with the United States to discuss a permanent peace treaty to replace the armistice that ended fighting in the 1950-53 Korean War, than with the the group hosted by China and also involved South Korea, Japan and Russia.

Some analysts and defectors from the North say the leaders in Pyongyang have a genuine fear of an invasion by the United States launched from the soils of its ally, South Korea. There is also huge mileage for domestic propaganda purposes in tellings its public that it was negotiating with the United States on equal footing. Staging a deadly attack in the waters near a naval border it had disputed gives the North’s military an excuse to demand talks on ending a truce.

PEACE TREATY

This a variation on the above scenario, with the difference that the North is looking for a security framwework instead of aid. The Cheonan sinking is the latest in a series of incidents along the disputed maritime border in the Yellow Sea, including an exchange of artillery fire in January.

Kim Jong-il may be hoping to goad the United States into taking more seriously his demands to finally agree a peace treaty to formally end the 1950-53 Korean War. Washington has been reluctant to be lured into those talks, arguing the North must first give up its efforts to build nuclear weapons.

Much of the justification for his iron rule, and extreme poverty that faces most of his population, is that it is the only way to keep a beligerent United States at bay. A peace treaty would not only allow him to stop raiding his depleted treasury to pay for one of the world’s largest standing armies, some analysts say it would also open the way to international financial aid for his broken economy.

The peninsula remains in a technical state of war because the Korean War ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. If Kim keeps making the Yellow Sea border — drawn unilaterally by the U.S.-led United Nations Command at the end of the war — a combat zone, maybe that would eventually lead to peace treaty talks. After all, previous instances of North Korean misbehaviour resulted in negotiations that led to benefits.

ARMS SALES DEMO

North Korea depended heavily on exports of missile and artillery parts for a large part of its income before a U.N. sanctions last year for testing a nuclear device sharply cut off its trade. It may have wanted to demonstrate its capabilities in submarine and torpedo warfare. (Editing by Jonathan Thatcher and Bill Tarrant)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Q+A – How serious is the crisis on the Korean peninsula?

May 24, 2010 By Leave a Comment

The two Koreas raised their war-like rhetoric on Monday, threatening conflict if the other side pushes too far in escalating tension after Seoul accused Pyongyang of torpedoing one of its navy ships.

Following are some questions about how serious the crisis is, what may be behind North Korean leader Kim Jong-il’s provocative moves and whether there is a risk of war.

WILL THERE BE WAR?

Most analysts doubt there will be war, as long as South Korea holds its fire.

North Korea’s obsolete conventional armed forces and military equipment mean quick and certain defeat if it wages full-scale war and Pyongyang is well aware of its limits.

South Korea has made it clear it will not retaliate despite investigations that found a torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine sank the Cheonan corvette in March, killing 46 sailors.

It knows the investment community will take fright if it does attack.

SO EVERYTHING IS SAFE AND SOUND?

No.

As the level of rhetoric rises, there is always a risk of skirmishes which could in turn develop into wider conflict.

President Lee Myung-bak has raised the stakes by saying in a national address that the South would exercise its right to defend itself if the North provoked it again.

North Korea has said much the same.

Both have carefully avoided sounding like the aggressor, promising to fight only if the other strikes first.

But South Korea said it would resume loudspeaker broadcasts against the North at their armed border. Pyongyang says it will shoot at the equipment.

Another risk could be the build-up of U.S. military forces on the peninsula that will be seen by the North as a sign of imminent invasion, something that leaders in Pyongyang are said to be genuinely afraid of.

The United States, which has about 28,000 troops stationed on the peninsula, threw its full support behind South Korea but said it was working hard to stop the escalation getting out of hand.

WHAT IS KIM JONG-IL TRYING TO DO?

The torpedo attack was likely ordered directly by Kim Jong-il. South Korea’s military says it was probably carried out be the same unit it believes was responsible for the assassination of several cabinet ministers while visiting Myanmar and the bombing of a Korean passenger jet, both in the 1980s. Those incidents are thought to have been on the orders of Kim.

The South Korean government says a key reason for sinking the Cheonan was probably in retaliation for the North Korean navy’s humiliation in a skirmish last November. South Korea says it was also looking for a distraction after a disastrous currency revaluation late last year reportedly led to rare protests against the hardline government.

North Korea had a rough start to the year in terms of economic difficulties after pledging on New Year’s Day to make it a top priority to improve the lives of the people.

The suspension of aid from the South under Lee since 2008 has deepened its economic woes. U.N. sanctions imposed after last year’s nuclear test have also cut into the North’s key source of hard cash — the trade in arms.

Analysts say the North’s leaders often resort to raising regional tensions to divert attention from troubles at home.

Kim, whose own health appears weak, is trying to promote his youngest son as heir.

There is concern in the South that Kim may be inclined to more lethal provocations because the routine sabre-rattling of recent years no longer seems to work to force concessions out of the South and regional powers.

WHAT ARE THE RISKS TO INVESTORS?

Lee’s government said it plans to take the case to the U.N. Security Council rather than take the law into its own hands.

Market players tend not to bet confrontation between the two Koreas will escalate into armed conflict because they believe Seoul will not risk the damage to its own economy and its powerful neighbours in North Asia, who together account for about a sixth of the world’s economic output.

In South Korea, even a nuclear test does little to rattle financial markets which have become largely inured to the North’s behaviour.

The won fell more than two percent to an eight-month low in early trading on Monday, partly driven down by the North Korea concerns. It recovered a little, with traders seeing the rhetoric as falling well short of actual war.

Local financial markets took some relief from Lee’s comments which steered clear of any suggestion of military retaliation. Some analysts said historic trends point to any market losses will remain brief, unless in the event of a total war.

(Editing by Jonathan Thatcher)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Q+A – How serious is the crisis on the Korean peninsula?

May 21, 2010 By Leave a Comment

North Korea said on Friday the peninsula was heading towards war after Seoul accused the reclusive state of torpedoing a navy ship near their disputed border, driving tensions to their highest levels in years.

Following are some questions about how serious the crisis is and what may be behind North Korean leader Kim Jong-il’s provocative moves.

WILL THERE BE WAR?

Most analysts believe there will not be war on the peninsula as long as South Korea holds its fire.

North Korea’s obsolete conventional armed forces and military equipment mean quick and near certain defeat if it wages full-scale war, and Pyongyang is well aware of its limits.

Even though it has exploded nuclear devices, North Korea has not shown it has a working nuclear bomb. Experts say they do not believe the North has the ability to miniaturise an atomic weapon to place on a missile, but the secretive state has been trying to develop such a warhead.

North Korea’s ageing fleet of Soviet-era bombers would also have difficulty evading the technologically advanced air forces of regional powers the United States, South Korea and Japan to deliver a nuclear bomb outside the country.

Moreover, South Korea has made clear it will not retaliate after findings showed it was a torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine that sunk the Cheonan corvette, killing 46 sailors.

The greatest risk that could fuel armed confrontation lies in small-scale skirmishes that might develop into larger conflict.

Another risk could be the buildup of U.S. military forces on the peninsula that will be seen by the North as a sign of imminent invasion, something that leaders in Pyongyang are said to be genuinely frightened of.

WHAT IS KIM JONG-IL TRYING TO DO?

The torpedo attack was almost certainly ordered directly by Kim Jong-il. The most likely explanation for the attack is that it was in retaliation for a naval skirmish last November that severely damaged a North Korean vessel. That ship had intruded into the South’s waters and was pounded with thousands of rounds of gunfire.

North Korea had a particularly rough start to the year in terms of economic difficulties after pledging on New Year’s Day to make it a top priority to improve the lives of the people. A botched currency reform in November nearly crippled what little market functions there were, reportedly inciting public unrest in some parts of the country and prompting authorities to ease restrictions on free market activities.

The suspension of aid from the South under President Lee Myung-bak since 2008 has deepened its economic woes. U.N. sanctions imposed after last year’s nuclear test have also cut into the North’s key source of hard cash — the trade in arms.

Analysts say the North’s leaders often resort to raising regional tensions to divert attention from troubles at home.

Kim, whose own health is in question, is trying to promote his youngest son as heir.

There is concern in the South that Kim may be inclined to more lethal provocations because the routine sabre-rattling of recent years no longer seems to work to force concessions out of the South and regional powers.

WHAT ARE THE RISKS TO INVESTORS?

President Lee’s government has hinted at taking the issue to the international community, mostly likely the U.N. Security Council, rather than taking the law into its own hands.

Market players do not expect the issue to escalate into armed conflict because they believe Seoul will not risk the damage to its own economy and the region as a whole, which accounts for about a sixth of the world’s economic output.

Last year’s nuclear test barely impacted financial markets which have become largely inured to the North’s behaviour.

But South Korean stocks took a dip and the won posted its biggest daily fall in more than 10 months on Thursday following the South’s formal announcement of blame for the ship sinking. Hawkish comments from both sides weighed on investor sentiment, already fragile after lingering concerns over euro zone debt problems.

Financial markets were closed for a holiday in South Korea on Friday but further comments from Lee next week on how Seoul would respond could weigh on sentiment, reflecting the highest levels of tensions in recent years.

On Thursday, five-year South Korean CDS was 10 bps wider at 130/135, the highest since September 2009. [EMRG/DBT] Three-year treasury June contracts ended up 7 ticks at 111.14.

(Editing by Jonathan Thatcher and Jeremy Laurence)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

South Korea claims proof that North Korean torpedo sank its ship

May 19, 2010 By Leave a Comment

New York, May 19 (ANI): South Korea will claim that a North Korean torpedo was the culprit in sinking their naval ship, according to domestic media reports.

The torpedo smashed into the ship, broke it into half, caused it to sink and killed 46 South Korean sailors.

The revelation will widen the existing chasm between the two countries as it breaks the tenuous calm that prevailed since the end of the Korean war.

South Korea is meticulously amassing evidence to support this claim, as this will help in mobilizing international opinion in their favour and probably result in further isolation of their belligerent neighbour.

“We will blame a torpedo attack and link it to North Korea,” said a government official briefed on the investigation, adding that the authorities were still fine-tuning an official announcement to be made on Thursday, the New York Times reports.

He refused to discuss forensic evidence that will be cited in the report.

In a series of closed-door briefings scheduled for Wednesday, the Foreign Ministry intends to present to Chinese, Russian, Japanese and European diplomats “scientific and objective evidence to back up the conclusion that it was a North Korean torpedo attack,” said the South Korean news agency Yonhap.

However, China’s affinity to North Korea could prove to be a stumbling block in South Korea’s plans, as China has the veto-power and will need to be convinced beyond any doubt before they act against North Korea for whom they hold a sympathetic view, the New York Times said.

Investigators reportedly established a critical forensic link when they matched metal pieces and traces of explosive recovered from the ship with a stray North Korean torpedo secured by the South seven years ago, Yonhap and other South Korean news outlets reported.

They also said they had found a fragment believed to be part of a North Korean torpedo’s propeller, the paper said. (ANI)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

South Korean ship with 100 onboard sinks after suspected North Korean torpedo attack

March 27, 2010 By Leave a Comment

London, Mar. 27 (ANI): A South Korean naval ship with 104 people on board has been sunk off North Korea”s west coast in what is being described as a suspected torpedo attack by North Korea.

According to local media, the ship – currently not named – went down near Baengnyeong Island, killing “several”.

The Sun quoted South Korean media as saying that a South Korean naval ship with more than 100 on board was sinking in the waters off the west coast near North Korea and a rescue operation is under way.

The report added that the South Korean ship had fired shots at an unidentified ship in the North.

While the incident has not been confirmed by South Korean Government officials, the country’s YTN TV network said an emergency security meeting is being held.

It added the government is investigating whether the sinking was due to a torpedo attack by North Korea.

The network also quoted a government source saying it was “unclear” whether the incident was related to North Korea.

“We are currently focusing on rescuing people,” the source said.

The incident took place near a disputed Yellow Sea maritime border off the west coast of the peninsula that was the scene of two deadly naval fights between South and North Korea in the past decade. (ANI)

Filed Under: International News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,